The notions of noesis and noema need to be understood as part of Husserl’s account of
constitution (See the summary for Husserl:
Constitution.). The noetic resources function to
constitute the noema—the account of constitution is two-sided. Husserl also
uses the term “noesis” in a narrower sense, viz., for the interpreting
part among the constitutive resources, as opposed to the part that undergoes
interpretation. Thus, in Husserl’s account of the constitution of spatially
extended objects, the kinesthetic sensations, in their “animating” functioning
towards the visual sensations, can be regarded as the noesis. Disagreements over
the nature of the perceptual noema have sparked a notable debate. According to
the West Coast interpretation (Føllesdal, and Smith and McIntyre), the noema is an
abstract object, akin to Fregean sense.
According to the East Coast interpretation (Sokolowski and
Drummond), the noema is the object we perceive, as experienced by us.

Husserl's theory of meaning is often regarded as a somewhat obscure attempt at a view which frege stated more clearly. I argue that while this may be true with respect to the "ideas," it is false with respect to the "logical investigations." the theory presented in the latter work is superior to frege's theory. It provides an objective foundation for the semantical distinctions which concerned frege while remaining within the confines of an ontology that is more economical than frege's.

This paper critiques Dagfinn Follesdal's influential interpretation of the Husserlian noema as a Fregean sense. Though other philosophers have argued that Follesdal's interpretation is mistaken, this paper demonstrates that the origin of the error is a fundamental misunderstanding, on Follesdal's part, of Husserlian terminology. The paper also examines the views of David Woodruff Smith and Ronald McIntyre who, influenced by Follesdal, mistakenly read the Husserl of the "Ideas" as a linguistically motivated philosopher. The paper concludes that, if Follesdal and his (...) followers were correct, certain methodological implications would follow for Husserlian phenomenology that would lead to its demise. (shrink)

This paper is concerned with the application of constructions from category theory to Smith and McIntyre's interpretation of Husserl's intentionality. 1 Not only did Hussefl's own ideas change in the course of his lifetime 2 but there are a number of interpretations of Husserl's work 3 so that the line of philosophical investigation that Husserl strongly influenced is still in the process of development. In this vein, Smith and McIntyre have recognized the potential for a possible worlds interpretation of intentionality (...) in Hussefl's writing 4 which has led them to extend their interpretation to give a many worlds account of intentionality. 5 Thus, while Smith and McIntyre have refuted interpretations of Husserl's noema in terms of ideal objects, they have been willing to explicate the noerna using possible objects. (shrink)

In the last twenty years, beginning with a seminal paper by Dagfinn Follesdal published in 1969,1 analytic philosophy has shown a renewed and increasing interest in Husserl's phenomenology. 2 In Husserl and Inten- tionality, David Woodruff Smith and Ronald Mclntyre give an important contribution to this line of research. The book is written in the analytic tradition, and represents in part an attempt at making phenomenology palatable to those who look suspiciously at 'continental philosophy'. Thus it provides a double service: (...) it introduces phenomenology to an analytic public, and it shows to those raised in the opposite tradition what kind of reception their tradition has overseas. (shrink)

This paper aims to analyse an »original phenomenological scene«, which we are designating by the expression »the gallery of Dresden«, and which refers to the inclusion of an image in an other image, ad infinitum. The paper argues that the complex images are a pattern of the complexity of the noematic strata in the Husserlian phenomenology and that they are of a great importance for the phenomenological elucidation of objectuality and for the description of the structures of the »noematic sphere’ (...) as dual-recessive structures. (shrink)

The rift which has long divided the philosophical world into opposed schools-the "Continental" school owing its origins to the phenomenology of Husserl and the "analytic" school derived from Frege-is finally closing.

In reworking his Logical Investigations Husserl adopts two positions that were not actually incorporated into later editions of the Investigations but do appear in other writings: (1) a new distinction between signitive and significative intentions, and (2) the claim that even naming and perceiving acts are categorially formed. This paper investigates Husserl's notion of noematic sense and the pure grammatical '<span class='Hi'>categories</span>' intimated therein in order to shed light on these new positions. The paper argues that the development of the (...) theories of the noema and of pure grammar allows us to recognize how even merely perceived or named things have a certain categoriality belonging to them, but that this development also requires us to distinguish between an anticipatory categoriality and an articulated categoriality. (shrink)

This paper argues that frege did not significantly influence husserl's departure from psychologism by (1) examining husserl's early logical reflections, Especially those concerning the meaning of the term ""vorstellung"," and (2) determining which parts of husserl's "philosophy of arithmetic", Criticized for its psychologism by frege, Were psychologistic and when husserl rejected them. It concludes that the logical writings show an independent movement toward a non-Psychologistic position and that the psychologism of "philosophy of arithmetic" was abandoned by 1891 apart from any (...) fregean influence. (shrink)

This book seems to us potentially as important as any work that has appeared in the last few decades for the purpose of understanding Hussefl's thought in its relation to other recent philosophical traditions, especially certain aspects of the analytical tradition. Yet there is a distinct danger that it will not receive the attention it amply merits. One reason for this danger is the unfortunate tendency we all have of dismissing ideas by pidgeonholing them.

This book seems to us potentially as important as any work that has appeared in the last few decades for the purpose of understanding Hussefl's thought in its relation to other recent philosophical traditions, especially certain aspects of the analytical tradition. Yet there is a dis- tinct danger that it will not receive the attention it amply merits. One reason for this danger is the unfortunate tendency we all have of dis- missing ideas by pidgeonholing them. It is seductively tempting (...) to label the Smith-McIntyre book as yet another exposition of the by this time not unfamiliar Fr approach to Husserlian phenomenology. 1 Since this approach is still being viewed with a healthy, or perhaps rather unhealthy, skepticism by many soi-disant phenomenologists, this label seems to be a handy way of dismissing Husserl and Intentionality from the active attention of many philosophers. (shrink)

SummaryIntentionality, the central theme of Husserl's phenomenology, is the characteristic feature of consciousness that it always seems to be directed towards an object. There need not always be such an object, but consciousness is always as if of an object. Consciousness structures our surroundings, within the limits imposed upon us by sensory experience. The structuring involves the past and the future as well as the present. It also involves values and practical functions, and our body and bodily skills play an (...) important role in the structuring. Husserl's notions of constitution and of inner and outer horizon are discussed, as well as his theory of intersubjectivity. Finally, the notion of ‘positing’ is discussed, and the role of the body in the emergence of our notions of reality and existence. (shrink)

The article is a comparative critical discussion of the views of Brentano and Husserl on intentional objects and on perception. Brentano's views on intentional objects are first discussed, with special attention to the problems connected with the status of the intentional objects. It is then argued that Husserl overcomes these problems by help of his notion of noema. Similarly, in the case of perception, Brentano's notion of physical phenomena is argued to be less satisfactory than Husserl's notion of hyle, whose (...) role in Husserl's theory of perception is briefly sketched. (shrink)

The Snark is an intentional object. I examine the general philosophical characteristics of thoughts of objects from the perspective of Husserl's, hyle, noesis, and noema and show how this meets constraints of opacity, normativity, and possible existence as generated by a sensitive theory of intentionality. Husserl introduces terms which indicate the normative features of intentional content and attempts to forge a direct relationship between the norms he generates and the actual world object which a thought intends. I then attempt to (...) relate Husserl's account to Fregean insights about the sense and reference of a term. Neither Husserl nor Frege suggest plausible routes to a naturalistic account of intentionality and I turn to Wittgenstein to provide a naturalistic reading of the crucial terms involved in the analysis of intentional content. His account is normative in a way required by both Husserl and Frege and yet manages a kind of Aristotelian naturalism which avoids crude biologism. (shrink)

In this paper, I will focus on the phenomenological notion of sense which Husserl calls in Ideen I noematic sense. My reading of Ideen I is based on the interpretation of noema as “object as it is intended”. This notion is developed from “filling sense” in LU. Similar to the Russellian “knowledge by acquaintance”, Husserl means by this notion the direct intuitive acquaintance with an intentional object. However, unlike Russell, Husserl doesn’t restrict this notion to sense data, but extend it (...) to the acquaintance with the perspective way of appearance of an intentional object (Erscheinungsweise, Abschattungen). This is because, unlike Frege, Husserl includes not only intension (Materie), but also illocutionary force (Aktqualität) into his notion of sense (LU, 6. Untersuchung, p. 617). This performative notion of sense requires him to take account of the acquaintance with the background of speech acts as a constitutive part of the broadest notion of sense (Ideen I, p. 233f., 322). If a conjecture e.g. about the back side of a cube: “the back side must be a square”, changes through a perception into a claim about it: “this side is indeed a square”, the change of the illocutionary forces, that is, the “filling sense” of the perception is expressed not by intentional materials (side, square etc.), but by indexicals, modal verbs or tenses, which are understood in a direct acquaintance with the perspective appearance of the cube. Thus, “the changing noematic way of appearance of the whole object as sense” (Husserliana vol. XI, p. 333) is the background or horizon, in implicit acquaintance with which illocutionary forces (Aktqualität in LU, noetischer Charakter in Ideen I) of propositional attitudes towards perceptual objects can be understood. (shrink)

The primary aim of my dissertation is to provide a phenomenologically sound interpretation of Husserl's view concerning the intentionality of perceptual consciousness by means of examining his crucial concept of noema. I argue that recent commentators such as Dagfinn Follesdal and his followers have gone astray in their interpretations of the noema through a failure to adequately appreciate Husserl's phenomenological method. According to the Follesdal interpretation, the perceptual noema is not, with regard to ordinary cases of perception, in any sense (...) the object presented to consciousness. On their view it is rather an abstract entity that is somehow correlated with conscious acts and is thus responsible for this particular object appearing to consciousness in this particular way. I contend that this interpretation is defended by means of a misreading of two fundamental features of Husserl's writings. First, it is based on a misunderstanding of the phenomenological method. According to this mistaken view, the purview of phenomenological investigation is limited to the conscious act alone, and in no sense involves the object of that act. Second, it is based on a misinterpretation of Husserl's likening of the noema to linguistic Sinn. I argue against both of these lines of reasoning in detail. The first I demonstrate to be inconsistent with Husserl's own characterization of the phenomenological reduction in Ideas I and elsewhere. The second I show to result from a failure to acknowledge Husserl's fundamental insight that a certain kind of meaning permeates not only our mental life but also the world itself insofar as it is present to consciousness. After establishing these two points I provide an account of the perceptual noema as consisting in just this Sinn as it is discovered in the object of perceptual consciousness. It is this Sinn, I contend, that constitutes the object of physical object perception. I conclude by considering to what extent the phenomenological elucidation of such constitution provides a justification for Husserl's own commitment to transcendental idealism. (shrink)

The subject of the present work is noema and its structure in various stages of the objectivating process. Despite its great importance, this issue has never been adequately explained, neither by Husserl nor by his followers. The main objective is to provide the theory that would describe the structure of noema and its function without simplifying the case or appealing to non-phenomenological data. This has been achieved by way of analysis divided into four sections. The first provides an overview of (...) noema. The second section is devoted to analysis of the process of objectivation, i.e., how an active awareness of the object in a logical sense is constituted by a series of passive experiences. The third section refers to a noema as found at different stages of objectivation. It explains how the increasing level of activity, which turns out to be a noetic function, causes changes to the structure of a noema. The last section summarises the results and stresses the advantages of the developed theory in comparison with other interpretations, especially those offered by Drummond, Smith and McIntyre. (shrink)

The years of study on Husserl’s theory of intentionality have led to a number of non-equivalent interpretations. The present work attempts to investigate the most prominent of these by presenting both their advantages and difficulties. However, its key point is specifically the analysis of Husserl’s theory. This is made in several stages that are concerned with the relation between noesis and noema: whether it is one-to-one or many-to-one, the kind of transcendency and dependency between them, and whether noema supervenes on (...) noesis. Moreover, Husserl’s theory is also examined in—usually ignored—instances of contradiction, nonsense and intentional conflict. The outcome is a fresh reading in which noema occurs as the possibly thinkable content capable of constituting multi-objective references and composed of pure X explained in terms of syntactic matter and form. (shrink)

The present paper is guided by the belief that Edmund Husserl’s concept of noema can be significantly enriched when considered in light of extreme epistemological instances. These include the phenomena of the absurd and nonsense, but also intentional conflict and cases of consciousness directed to contradictory objects. The paper shows that the noema, when experienced in such a context, exhibits interesting characteristics that are rather difficult to note in other circumstances. The paper consists of five sections. The first interprets and (...) relates concepts from Logical Investigations to those from Ideas I. The second section discloses the noematic ability to assemble senses for which there is no corresponding object. The third section stresses that the noema must, in some instances, be able to comprise two separate structures of senses through which two different objects are meant. In the fourth section, all of these characteristics are shown to be restricted by the concept of nonsense and the laws of meaning-compounding. In this way, the noema is clarified as “possibly thinkable content.” Finally, in Sect. 5, this idea is brought into dialogue with the most significant interpretations of the noema. (shrink)